Marcha, Alsander Joshua O.

Grade 10

GMO Facts: 10 Common GMO Claims Debunked

Later this year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture may approve the Arctic Granny and

Arctic Golden, the first genetically modified apples to hit the market. Although it

will probably be another two years before the non-browning fruits appears in stores, at

least one producer is already scrambling to label its apples GMO-free.

The looming apple campaign is just the latest salvo in the ongoing war over genetically modified organisms (GMOs)—one that’s grown increasingly contentious. Over the past

decade, the controversy surrounding GMO facts has sparked worldwide riots and the

vandalism of crops in Oregon, the United Kingdom, Australia, and the Philippines. In

May, the governor of Vermont signed a law that will likely make it the first U.S. state

to require labels for genetically engineered ingredients; more than 50 nations already

mandate them. Vermont State Senator David Zuckerman told Democracy Now!, “As consumers,

we are guinea pigs, because we really don’t understand the ramifications.”

But the truth is, GMOs have been studied intensively, and they look a lot more prosaic

than the hype contends. To make Arctic apples, biologists took genes from Granny Smith

and Golden Delicious varieties, modified them to suppress the enzyme that causes

browning, and reinserted them in the leaf tissue. It’s a lot more accurate than

traditional methods, which involve breeders hand-pollinating blossoms in hopes of

producing fruit with the desired trait. Biologists also introduce genes to make plants

pest- and herbicide-resistant; those traits dominate the more than 430 million acres of

GMO crops that have already been planted globally. Scientists are working on varieties

that survive disease, drought, and flood.

So what, exactly, do consumers have to fear?10 of the most common claims about GMOs and

interviewed nearly a dozen scientists. Their collective answer: not much at all.

1) Genetic engineering is a radical technology.

Humans have been manipulating the genes of crops for millennia by selectively breeding

plants with desirable traits.

2) GMOs are too new for us to know if they are dangerous.

Genetically engineered plants first appeared in the lab about 30 years ago and became a

commercial product in 1994. Since then, more than 1,700 peer-reviewed safety studies

have been published, including five lengthy reports from the National Research Council,

that focus on human health and the environment. The scientific consensus is that

existing GMOs are no more or less risky than conventional crops.

3) Farmers can’t replant genetically modified seeds.

Also called terminator genes, which can make seeds sterile, never made it out of the

patent office in the 1990s. Seed companies do require farmers to sign agreements that

prohibit replanting in order to ensure annual sales.

4) We don’t need GMOs—there are other ways to feed the world.

GMOs alone probably won’t solve the planet’s food problems. But with climate change and

population growth threatening food supplies, genetically modified crops could

significantly boost crop output.

5) GMOs cause allergies, cancer, and other health problems.

Many people worry that genetic engineering introduces hazardous proteins, particularly

allergens and toxins, into the food chain.

6) All research on GMOs has been funded

er the past decade, hundreds of independent researchers have published peer-reviewed

safety studies. At least a dozen medical and scientific groups worldwide, including the

World Health Organization and the American Association for the Advancement of Science,

have stated that the GMOs currently approved for market are safe.

7) Genetically modified crops cause farmers to overuse pesticides and herbicides.

his claim requires a little parsing. Two relevant GMOs dominate the market. The first

enables crops to express a protein from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt),

which is toxic to certain insects. It’s also the active ingredient in pesticides used

by organic farmers. Bt crops have dramatically reduced reliance on chemical

insecticides in some regions, says Bruce Tabashnik, a University of Arizona

entomologist.

The second allows crops to tolerate the herbicide glyphosate so that farmers can spray

entire fields more liberally yet kill only weeds. Glyphosate use has skyrocketed in the

U.S. since these GMOs were introduced in 1996. But glyphosate is among the mildest

herbicides available, with a toxicity 25 times less than caffeine. Its use has

decreased reliance on more toxic alternatives, such as atrazine.

8) GMOs create super-insects and super-weeds.

If farmers rely too heavily on Bt or glyphosate, then pesticide resistance is

inevitable, says Tabashnik. That’s evolution at work, and it’s analogous to antibiotics

creating hardier bacteria. It is an increasing problem and could lead to the return of

harsher chemicals. The solution, he says, is to practice integrated pest management,

which includes rotating crops. The same goes for any type of farming.

9) GMOs harm beneficial insect species.

Bt insecticides attach to proteins found in some insects’ guts, killing select species.

For most insects, a field of Bt crops is safer than one sprayed with an insecticide

that kills indiscriminately. But monarch butterflies produce the same proteins as one

of Bt’s target pests, and a 1999 Cornell University lab experiment showed that feeding

the larvae milkweed coated in Bt corn pollen could kill them. Five studies published in

2001, however, found that monarchs aren’t exposed to toxic levels of Bt pollen in the

wild.

A 2012 paper from Iowa State University and the University of Minnesota suggested

glyphosate-tolerant GMOs are responsible for monarchs’ recent population decline. The

herbicide kills milkweed (the larvae’s only food source) in and near crops where it’s

applied.

10)Modified genes spread to other crops and wild plants, upending the ecosystem.

According to Wayne Parrott, a crop geneticist at the University of Georgia, the risk

for neighboring farms is relatively low. For starters, it’s possible to reduce the

chance of cross-pollination by staggering planting schedules, so that fields pollinate

during different windows of time. (Farmers with adjacent GMO and organic fields already

do this.) And if some GMO pollen does blow into an organic field, it won’t necessarily

nullify organic status. Even foods that bear the Non-GMO Project label can be 0.5

percent GMO by dry weight.

As for a GMO infiltrating wild plants, the offspring’s survival partly depends on

whether the trait provides an adaptive edge. Genes that help wild plants survive might

spread, whereas those that, say, boost vitamin A content might remain at low levels or

fizzle out entirely.

Examples of GMO:

Cheese

Corn

Cotton

Papaya

Rapeseed

Soy

Squash

Wine

References

Borel, B. ( 2014, July 11). GMO Facts: 10 Common GMO Claims Debunked. Retrieved from POPULAR SCIENCE: https://www.popsci.com/article/science/core-truths-10-common-gmo-claims-debunked/